Does anyone have a Tamron 18-400 lens..just want to hear about it

[Cortian]

Example my 18-140 is significantly heavier and bulkier than my 18-70.

Interestingly enough: The Canon 18-135 is barely larger than the 17-85, and actually weighs slightly less.

My 18-70 is a variable aperture kit lens that came with my D70, not a f/2.8 lens.

The 17-85mm is f/4-5.6 and the 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, so roughly equivalent in that respect.

I guess I missed your point?

 

[ac12]

Example my 18-140 is significantly heavier and bulkier than my 18-70.

Interestingly enough: The Canon 18-135 is barely larger than the 17-85, and actually weighs slightly less.

My 18-70 is a variable aperture kit lens that came with my D70, not a f/2.8 lens.

The 17-85mm is f/4-5.6 and the 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, so roughly equivalent in that respect.

I guess I missed your point?

I did not realize that the Canon 17-85 and 18-135 were similar in weight.
In the case of Nikon the 18-140 is 100g heavier, and I can feel the difference. So the lighter 18-70 comes out for family stuff, where I don't need the reach of the 18-140.

 

[astroNikon]

FYI, Tamron themselves have MTF charts for this lens, near the bottom of the page.
==> TAMRON | 18-400mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD

The key point is that this lens is for "one lens convenience"
Which would be good for that if you find yourself walking in close quarters to subjects AND far away distances in the same walkaround. And without changing lenses one can handle it with this lens.

It all comes down to compromises as mentioned earlier and it's not bad for the image in the center of the frame:
It's not a high dollar lens.
It's not a high quality lens.
It is a low cost lens for the focal length of 18mm to 400mm you are buying.

There's other convenience lenses
18-300mm / 28-300
150-600 (and all the variations such as 150-500, 50-500)
80-400, etc.
They are not very good compared to Primes. But the price difference is large for high quality images. But with a high inconvenience rate for changing lenses.

So it goes back to how you want to use the lens and your price point.

 

[Photo Lady]

FYI, Tamron themselves have MTF charts for this lens, near the bottom of the page.
==> TAMRON | 18-400mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD

The key point is that this lens is for "one lens convenience"
Which would be good for that if you find yourself walking in close quarters to subjects AND far away distances in the same walkaround. And without changing lenses one can handle it with this lens.

It all comes down to compromises as mentioned earlier and it's not bad for the image in the center of the frame:
It's not a high dollar lens.
It's not a high quality lens.
It is a low cost lens for the focal length of 18mm to 400mm you are buying.

There's other convenience lenses
18-300mm / 28-300
150-600 (and all the variations such as 150-500, 50-500)
80-400, etc.
They are not very good compared to Primes. But the price difference is large for high quality images. But with a high inconvenience rate for changing lenses.

So it goes back to how you want to use the lens and your price point.

Thats exactly why i love the 18-270mm for the convenience... i just love that it does it all without changing lenses.. so all i really wanted to know was the 18-400 that much better? I am beginning to think it is somewhat better in all ways but is it worth spending $600 on a new one .. i just bought the Nikon D7500 camera... so really just thought i would upgrade the lens too..thanks so much

 

[Photo Lady]

If you simply want the reach, for example to shoot birds, I would get a long tele zoom, rather than a super zoom.
There are less optical compromises, and better image quality.
Example, the Tamron 100-400 or 150-600.
However the 150-600 is a bigger and significantly heavier lens, and you will very likely need a decent tripod for it.

Comparisons:
The Tamron 18-400 weighs 705g, $650 on Amazon.
The Tamron 100-400 weighs 1115g, $800 on Amazon.
The Tamron 150-600 weighs 1980g, $880 on Amazon.

thanks so much..good advice

 

[astroNikon]

Thats exactly why i love the 18-270mm for the convenience... i just love that it does it all without changing lenses.. so all i really wanted to know was the 18-400 that much better? I am beginning to think it is somewhat better in all ways but is it worth spending $600 on a new one .. i just bought the Nikon D7500 camera... so really just thought i would upgrade the lens too..thanks so much

The "BETTER" in this regards is that it goes to 400mm.
your Tamron 18-270, of course, only goes to 270mm. So it's "better" by 130mm.

I searched on the internet for Tamron 18-270 vs 18-400 and there's not much.
They are both f/3.5 to f/6.3 so the 400mm should hunt in low light as the same on the 18-270@270mm.

 

[Dave442]

When looking to use this as an all-in-one lens in place of the 18-270mm I would consider the extra weight. Weight: 15.9 oz vs 24.9 oz, so just over half a pound in extra weight. The 18-400mm lens has slightly better macro capability, something I use at work more often than the telephoto end. Both lenses have very similar designs with 16 elements, with the 18-400mm being 1.3" longer.

If you can carry the extra weight all the time, and you are often shooting at the 270mm end with the 18-270mm, then consider the 18-400mm.

 

[Cortian]

And don't dismiss that extra 1/2 lb. out-of-hand. Heck, the difference between our 20D and 40D bodies is only 1/10th of a pound, the 40D being 6% heavier than the 20D, and I noticed that.

I picked up the 20D my wife's using with that Tamron 18-400mm on it and thought "Boy, this sucker's heavy."

I have been entertaining the idea of getting a Canon 18-135mm and trading-in the 17-85mm to help finance it. Now I'm thinking I best hold on to that 17-85mm, because I suspect my wife's going to want it for a walking-about lens.

(Or she's going to want the 18-135mm and I'll need the 17-85mm back .)

 

[Photo Lady]

Thank you EVERYONE !.. I APPRECIATE THE ADVICE~

 

[SuzukiGS750EZ]

I own the 150-600 g2, but this lens had intrigued me since I saw it for the times I go out and can't decide on a lens such as children's school events, the odd sports event where I don't know the setting, family gatherings, etc. You have wide angle and telephoto in one. I have a 24mm, 50mm, 18-55, 55-250 and the 150-600 G2. That would cover most everything, but how good can a one lens do all really be...

 

[Photo Lady]

I own the 150-600 g2, but this lens had intrigued me since I saw it for the times I go out and can't decide on a lens such as children's school events, the odd sports event where I don't know the setting, family gatherings, etc. You have wide angle and telephoto in one. I have a 24mm, 50mm, 18-55, 55-250 and the 150-600 G2. That would cover most everything, but how good can a one lens do all really be...

thank you ..i will look into this lens and the other ones you mention.. i know it might not be the ultimate in all photos.. for all things but i just want one that is an improvement to the one i use daily ...thanks again

 

[Cortian]

@Photo Lady, The 150-600 is quite a large lens, and double the cost of the 18-400. It is not a "knock-about lens" like the 18-400.

 

[Photo Lady]

@Photo Lady, The 150-600 is quite a large lens, and double the cost of the 18-400. It is not a "knock-about lens" like the 18-400.

good to know this...thank you..

 

[Photo Lady]

well i purchased the 18- 400 and i am very pleased , i needed a all in one lens and this one does it all with finer photos then i had with the 18-270 simply because this is a brand new crystal clear lens.. it is lighter in weight.. as is the D7500 camera.. I understand completely what all of you explained about this lens..but in the end this was the lens that was right for me so i would not have to constantly change lens from work to hobby..I am loving my new camera.. although i loved the D7100 too.. And i am happy to say a very nice guy bought it and wrote me that he was totally satisfied withhis purchase.. I sent it to Nikon for a tune up and also had the pop up flash repaired.. came back like new/ thanks again everyone